Lots of old airports are a clusterfuck. Those places were built in the middle of nowhere 70-100 years ago but now find themselves practically inside the megacity.
Increased traffic and incredibly complicated approach routes does the rest.
What does being in the middle of a metroplex have to do with air and plane traffic incidences? The only thing I can guess is it constraining the airport to grow or remodel itself leading to perhaps inefficiencies.
Old airports have terrible runway design, the runways intersect (to save space) but this is dangerous and requires much more ATC coordination to manage. With modern runway design, if a plane takes off or lands out of sequence, it's unlikely to hit anything. With intersecting runways, that same accident becomes potentially fatal. These airports were also designed for smaller planes, fewer planes, and less passengers.
These issues are obvious to airport management, but airports cannot expand because nearby land is already allocated. The easiest option is to build a new airport, far from existing development.
Most of these airports were originally built far away from the city, but in the past half century the cities expanded so they new envelop the airport.
Less room for error, can't build extra runway(s) to cope with increasing demand. The current Mentour Pilot video actually discusses this issue in some depth re one of Washington DC's airports.
In my country prices are often wrong because supermarkets are run by a small team of literal teenagers (one of the downsides of having decent minimum wages is that nobody wants to hire anyone if they somehow can avoid it).
It's definitely possible for a job to have negative expected value for the employee, even if looking only at cash flow. MLMs are the most obvious way, but e.g. hairdressers often need to rent their station in the store -- while this can be a reasonable deal, it can also run negative.
Yeah when Americans talk about how bad a deal NATO is they always conveniently forget the military bases. Most of their wars tend to involve Ramstein for example.
Yep, also in my experience for some reason British people have a hard time understanding why this might be considered hostile from the people being bombed from our soil.
Even when given the example of roles reversed and asked how they would feel about France or Ireland if Russia had air bases in those countries they were using to bomb London, people just can’t see the issue.
In a sense we’re still under American occupation 80 years later, not just physically but more importantly in our minds
reply